OK, I stand corrected! It isn't intuitive to me that ensemble_size is the original size, but I see the logic and the definition is clear. Go for it. (It will be good for the definition, or something in the convention, to include the way in which this variable can be used, as is now being sorted.)
John --------------------------------------- John Graybeal jbgrayb...@mindspring.com On Jul 22, 2015, at 01:59, Hedley, Mark <mark.hed...@metoffice.gov.uk> wrote: > I'm not sure I agree with John's last statement. I think that an ensemble is > a defined collection of members, so my need is the need for ensemble size to > be defined explicitly. > The distinction that not all members may be present characterises the need > for this metadata descriptor, rather than just using the dimension size of > realization, which does not meet my requirement. > > On reflection, I think that I prefer Karl's name of 'ensemble_size'
_______________________________________________ CF-metadata mailing list CF-metadata@cgd.ucar.edu http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata
